N. Korea's continued defiance of the UN Security Council

[Tarmac]

---

^^^Hey! Stop it! I am the Spokesperson for the Philippines.......... joke! Bitaw, way ing-anaay oi! Di man kamo ang mag-giyera, unaha sa ang mga bu-sayaff sa south oi before ta muapil ug mas lisud nga kuntra. Anyway's asta ang China wa naman sad ganahi sa gibuhat sa North Korea. Cguro kung di kasukol ang US, naa pa man ang United Kingdom nga I think has more capabilities in wars because among the all European countries, the United Kingdom is them most war hardened country. Even at the Dawn of it's Empire, to it's rise as a Naval Superpower, to being alone in Europe facing the Germans after France's defeat.............. maybe they can do a lot this time.

Peace Everyone!

Kung dili ang US, samot pa ang UK. They don't even have much of a naval presence in the NW Pacific.

[leonell]

Well that's because of the demobilization treaty decades ago which decreased Britains power from 1 million forces and a large naval fleet to a 600,000 Troop Force and a medium sized navy. If the will mobilize their troops again, then they can do more than the US. They have survived the fiercest of wars because of their excellent decisions and high technological advantages. I even think they have a more advanced technology than the US.

Peace People

[Solidworm_rand]

Hilabtanon kaau ning US they think they own other countries sige mandar sa unsa buhaton sa uban.. salig super power sila.. pariha diri sa pinas sige lag bawbaw de karabaw ang mga politicain nato mura mga itoy sa US.. i think N. korea is just trying to say "KEEP OF THE GRASS YOU SONS OF BITCHES" hahahaha come on american people leave internal n. koran affairs to themselves its their country anyway... besides UN is there to monitor national laws.. so just leave the N. koreans alone...

one thing other countries di man gani mag mandar sa ilaha unsa ila mga binuang dira sa US soil so ayaw lng pud mandar sa uban countries...

[flanker]

^^^Hey! Stop it! I am the Spokesperson for the Philippines.......... joke! Bitaw, way ing-anaay oi! Di man kamo ang mag-giyera, unaha sa ang mga bu-sayaff sa south oi before ta muapil ug mas lisud nga kuntra. Anyway's asta ang China wa naman sad ganahi sa gibuhat sa North Korea. Cguro kung di kasukol ang US, naa pa man ang United Kingdom nga I think has more capabilities in wars because among the all European countries, the United Kingdom is them most war hardened country. Even at the Dawn of it's Empire, to it's rise as a Naval Superpower, to being alone in Europe facing the Germans after France's defeat.............. maybe they can do a lot this time.

Peace Everyone!

UK has no business in that area...

US lead NATO is crying for more troops in Afghanistan why would UK go to Nokor? for a suicide mission?

OT: Without USSR.. UK wouldnt be saved..

[leonell]

UK has no business in that area...

US lead NATO is crying for more troops in Afghanistan why would UK go to Nokor? for a suicide mission?

OT: Without USSR.. UK wouldnt be saved..

Or shall I say, without britain's victory on the "battle of britain" because of it's superiority on the air WITHOUT the help of the united states who I think is busy building up bastions within the Philippine Islands and reproducing ships after the destruction of pearl harbor?

Well USA and UK aren't all of NATO right, remember france, if only UK would mobilize it's troops and enlarge it's force which really possible, then they can finish off NoKor.

Hey, were not starting a new conversation here right? Peace people!

Ok let's go to USSR, Russia will actually fall if not because of Hitler's stupidity. The USSR at that time was the one in dire need so the US have to hasten up it's offensive on Europe and was forced to leave the Philippine Islands. Am I saying the truth? I don't know!

[Vince Russo]

Maybe it would be simpler to just organize an Olympics-type event wherein "conflict countries" pit their teams of mixed martial arts fighters (no weapons allowed) against opposing countries. Sell the rights to HBO and donate all proceeds to fund humanitarian research projects. No more hypothesizing about military superiority or which country is most battle-hardened blah blah blah... We'll see who's really the toughest then, won't we?

[Tarmac]

OT na kay layo ra kaayo ang North Korea sa Moscow, Britain ug Pearl Harbor, pero game!

Or shall I say, without britain's victory on the "battle of britain" because of it's superiority on the air WITHOUT the help of the united states who I think is busy building up bastions within the Philippine Islands and reproducing ships after the destruction of pearl harbor?

The Battle of Britain happened in 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor.

The United Kingdom no longer has an interest in maintaining a large navy because it no longer has colonies to protect. And the fact is, the UK economy can no longer support a large navy.

Ok let's go to USSR, Russia will actually fall if not because of Hitler's stupidity. The USSR at that time was the one in dire need so the US have to hasten up it's offensive on Europe and was forced to leave the Philippine Islands. Am I saying the truth? I don't know!

Two points.

1) On leaving the Philippine Islands. It is true that Allied leaders were in agreement that Europe should be prioritized over the Pacific campaign. Britain was the only country left in western Europe that wasn't in Nazi hands. It needed no less than the full support of the Allied nations and particularly the United States if it was to remain so.

The Allies also needed time to build up navy and army units before taking the offensive against the Japanese.

2) On Russia's potential "defeat".

Nazi Germany could never have defeated the Soviet Union if only because of the latter's sheer size--both geographical and population. It was like a daschund trying to hump a Woolly Mammoth, if you will.

The Soviet Union's early defeats in Hitler's blitzkrieg thrust into the Rodina were because of Stalin's egregious lapse in judgment, namely his blind trust in Hitler sticking to an existing non-aggression pact between their two countries. He was stabbed in the back while his pants were down.

After the early setbacks, he got back on his feet, mobilized his army through conscription, fired up its massive industrial machinery and solicited support from the United States, the world's largest economy. Stalin grew his army to over 8 million men. Tractor and truck factories became tank factories. US planes and war materiel came in under lend-lease agreements.

The Soviet wartime factories were located beyond the Ural Mountains, safe from German bombers and prying eyes. The Germans never knew the Soviets were churning out so much materiel or were capable of doing so in the first place.

So when the Soviets finally counter-attacked, they did so with such overwhelming force and in such numbers that German division after German division were swept aside. It didn't help that German supply lines were already stretched thin by the massive distances involved.

The Soviet counterthrust was led by the brilliant Gen. Zhukov. But the Soviets had another general to thank, namely "General Winter." That is, the harsh Soviet winters that could bring any army to a halt, particularly one as highly mechanized as the German army. Tank tracks froze into the ground rendering them immobile. Engine oil froze solid. Soldiers froze to death. It didn't help that winter at the time the Germans attacked was the harshest in many years.

Over a hundred years before, Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Russia and his Grand Armee met the same fate in the hands of General Winter.

Many historian say the Eastern front was the main event in the war in Europe. The size and scale of the conflict is something very few people in the west can even begin to comprehend. The west likes to think the end of Nazi Germany began with the Allied landings in Normandy.

In reality, France and North Africa were mere sideshows. Indeed, by the time the Allies finally landed in Normandy in June 1944, the Nazis had been all but defeated in the Eastern Front (Stalingrad and the pivotal Battle of Kursk was in 1943). Its crack divisions had been decimated. The retreating Nazis left scores of dead soldiers and destroyed tanks, trucks, guns, planes and other materiel in the Soviet Union. The Nazi war machinery had truly been shaken up.

So it's actually the other way round. Massive defeats in the Eastern front made the Allies' jobs in Western Europe and its southern underbelly (North Africa, then Italy) easier.

And another thing to consider. Hitler had to postpone, then cancel, the invasion of Britain because the war in the Eastern Front demanded too much of the Nazi war machinery.

Hitler could never have won the war against the Soviet Union. That he made strategic and tactical mistakes only hastened the inevitable.


.

[leonell]

^^^ But I've read that the Battle of Britain was fought on the air and not on ground forces. The Germans could defeat the Soviets but they seasons affected their strength (a lot of their soldiers were dying in frost and their heavy machinery and tanks were all frozen. Unlike the Soviets who are more used with that kind of season and were able to protect themselves effectively from freezing.

Ok! We are going far from the topic..........

Peace People

[Vince Russo]

OT na kay layo ra kaayo ang North Korea sa Moscow, Britain ug Pearl Harbor, pero game!



The Battle of Britain happened in 1940, more than a year before Pearl Harbor.

The United Kingdom no longer has an interest in maintaining a large navy because it no longer has colonies to protect. And the fact is, the UK economy can no longer support a large navy.





Two points.

1) On leaving the Philippine Islands. It is true that Allied leaders were in agreement that Europe should be prioritized over the Pacific campaign. Britain was the only country left in western Europe that wasn't in Nazi hands. It needed no less than the full support of the Allied nations and particularly the United States if it was to remain so.

The Allies also needed time to build up navy and army units before taking the offensive against the Japanese.

2) On Russia's potential "defeat".

Nazi Germany could never have defeated the Soviet Union if only because of the latter's sheer size--both geographical and population. It was like a daschund trying to hump a Woolly Mammoth, if you will.

The Soviet Union's early defeats in Hitler's blitzkrieg thrust into the Rodina were because of Stalin's egregious lapse in judgment, namely his blind trust in Hitler sticking to an existing non-aggression pact between their two countries. He was stabbed in the back while his pants were down.

After the early setbacks, he got back on his feet, mobilized his army through conscription, fired up its massive industrial machinery and solicited support from the United States, the world's largest economy. Stalin grew his army to over 8 million men. Tractor and truck factories became tank factories. US planes and war materiel came in under lend-lease agreements.

The Soviet wartime factories were located beyond the Ural Mountains, safe from German bombers and prying eyes. The Germans never knew the Soviets were churning out so much materiel or were capable of doing so in the first place.

So when the Soviets finally counter-attacked, they did so with such overwhelming force and in such numbers that German division after German division were swept aside. It didn't help that German supply lines were already stretched thin by the massive distances involved.

The Soviet counterthrust was led by the brilliant Gen. Zhukov. But the Soviets had another general to thank, namely "General Winter." That is, the harsh Soviet winters that could bring any army to a halt, particularly one as highly mechanized as the German army. Tank tracks froze into the ground rendering them immobile. Engine oil froze solid. Soldiers froze to death. It didn't help that winter at the time the Germans attacked was the harshest in many years.

Over a hundred years before, Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Russia and his Grand Armee met the same fate in the hands of General Winter.

Many historian say the Eastern front was the main event in the war in Europe. The size and scale of the conflict is something very few people in the west can even begin to comprehend. The west likes to think the end of Nazi Germany began with the Allied landings in Normandy.

In reality, France and North Africa were mere sideshows. Indeed, by the time the Allies finally landed in Normandy in June 1944, the Nazis had been all but defeated in the Eastern Front (Stalingrad and the pivotal Battle of Kursk was in 1943). Its crack divisions had been decimated. The retreating Nazis left scores of dead soldiers and destroyed tanks, trucks, guns, planes and other materiel in the Soviet Union. The Nazi war machinery had truly been shaken up.

So it's actually the other way round. Massive defeats in the Eastern front made the Allies' jobs in Western Europe and its southern underbelly (North Africa, then Italy) easier.

And another thing to consider. Hitler had to postpone, then cancel, the invasion of Britain because the war in the Eastern Front demanded too much of the Nazi war machinery.

Hitler could never have won the war against the Soviet Union. That he made strategic and tactical mistakes only hastened the inevitable.


.

Excellent summary and clarification of events. Well done, Tarmac.

[dick_tigas]

gon nga world war 3 hahaha